HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015/03/23 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session if/ St. Louis Park OFFICIAL MINUTES
MINN ES OTA CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MARCH 23, 2015
The meeting convened at 7:06 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg,
Anne Mavity, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmemng), City Assessor (Mr. Bultema), Senior Planner
(Mr. Walther), Housing Supervisor(Ms. Schnitker), Housing Programs Coordinator(Ms. Olson),
Communications Specialist (Ms. Pribbenow), and Recording Secretary(Ms. Hughes).
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning—April 6 & 13, 2015
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed special study session agenda for April 6`h and the
proposed study session agenda for April 13` .
2. Land Use and Zoning—Parkdale Drive Area
Mr. Walther presented the staff report and advised that a Purchase Agreement has been entered
into between Goldman Sachs and Excelsior Group to purchase all six of the Parkdales office
properties.
Councilmember Brausen stated these areas represent portals to the community and the City
should be intentionally guiding development that enhances the community. He stated the stnp
mall property owner talked to City staff about its interest in pursuing an option for the property
at 5305 Parkdale Dnve and rezoning the site to commercial but the City indicated it does not
currently have the time or resources to consider rezoning the site because of other pnorities.
Councilmember Sanger stated she did not want to see the area spot zoned and would rather see
the entire site redeveloped as one larger parcel, possibly commercial or mixed use, and would
prefer to wait until sufficient staff resources exist and let the property stay the way it is for now.
Councilmember Brausen stated the character of this area has moved away from industrial and he
felt this was a great location for senior affordable housing
Councilmember Spano stated the site is underutilized and the current use does not represent what
the City wants for this site in the future. He stated he would like to undertake a broader
comprehensive review of the south end of the site, including other uses and how the site interacts
with the railroad tracks and Highway 100.
Mr. Harmening stated this site does not represent the City's highest pnonty and he felt the City
should wait to see what happens with the Parkdale properties to the north. He stated that Council
has indicated its #1 pnonty is Southwest LRT and he felt that staff time was better spent on
Southwest LRT and he would add this site to the list of sites to consider in the future.
Councilmember Lindberg stated he respected Council's pnonties with respect to Southwest LRT
but wanted Council to be open enough from a policy perspective to change some of its pnonties
Study Session Minutes -2- March 23, 2015
when an opportunity presents itself and to remain open to other opportunities that need Council's
attention.
3. 2015 Assessment Report
Mr. Bultema presented the staff report and 2015 valuation report. He stated that the Local Board
of Appeal & Equalization will convene on Apnl 13, 2015, and the Assistant Hennepin County
Assessor will attend the Local Board meetings to listen. He reviewed 2014 market performance
and advised the St. Louis Park community is extremely marketable and values are moving up
with single-family stock showing a sustainable rate of growth of approximately 4% He stated
that condos are doing very well and the complexes that saw major declines in 2012 and 2013 are
bouncing back quickly. He stated the Class A and B apartment market continues to increase and
the Class C market is starting to take off He discussed the commercial and industrial properties
and noted a correction on page 7 of the staff report indicating Commercial-Industrial assessed
market value change of+3.6% with improvements should state +8 7% with improvements. He
stated the City's industrial stock does not move a lot and most of the stock is fairly dated with
most new stock being constructed outside of the City pnmarily due to the City's high land
values. He stated that the City's commercial stock is moving up at a healthy rate and rental rates
are being pushed up as we are seeing influx of institutional grade investors and coastal money.
He also discussed valuation density and stated the Shops at West End had a value density of$7.7
million per acre and Knollwood's value density was $2.8 million per acre, while the City's
industrial stock averages $1 million per acre and single-family stock averages $900,000 per acre.
He also discussed tax capacity and fiscal dispanties and stated the City will continue to pay into
the fiscal disparities pool.
4. Proposed Inclusionary Housing Policy Review
Ms. Schnitker presented the staff report and proposed inclusionary affordable housing policy.
She explained that market rate multi-unit developments that receive financial assistance from the
City would be required to provide affordable units and this requirement could be fulfilled by the
inclusion of affordable units within the proposed development on site or at another site approved
by the City or the developer could make payment of a fee in lieu of developing any affordable
units. She reviewed the proposed affordability levels and indicated that 60% affordability is
consistent with affordability level requirements for the Federal tax credit program and is
consistent with other policies reviewed by staff She advised that Cornerstone has a financial
feasibility calculation tool that the City used to test how requiring a certain percentage of
affordable units affects the financial feasibility of a project and found it was more difficult to
maintain profit margins if over 10% of units at 60% AMI are required without having some other
concessions, e.g., less parking. She reviewed other key components of the policy including
length of affordability requirement, bedroom mix, building size, and tenant eligibility She
stated the policy does not include cost mitigating incentives such as a density bonus or parking
requirement reduction and these incentives can be further explored if Council desires.
Councilmember Hallfin stated his opposition to allowing a developer to make payment of a fee
to the City in lieu of developing any affordable housing units because if that option is available
to developers they will likely pay the fee and not include any affordable units in a project.
Councilmember Mavity spoke in favor of the proposed inclusionary affordable housing policy
and asked about staff capacity in terms of enforcement and making sure properties are being
maintained.
Study Session Minutes -3- March 23, 2015
Ms. Schnitker advised that issues related to enforcement and staff capacity will need to be
addressed in the guidelines She stated it would be necessary to go through an annual process of
certifying incomes every year for eligible tenants and the City will have to monitor this annually.
Councilmember Mavity suggested that Council consider increasing its permit fees to recognize
the increased time and effort of City staff. She felt that having incentives for reduced parking
and increased density made sense in specific areas where appropriate She stated she felt this
was a great policy and wanted to see a policy that targeted people making $30,000 a year and
that included incentives for that as well.
Councilmember Brausen thanked staff for their hard work on the policy and stated his support
for the policy except he was not in favor of allowing a developer to make payment of a fee in
lieu of developing any affordable units He questioned whether the proposed policy does enough
and referenced Met Council's housing goals and the City's requirement to add 332 units with
half of those geared toward people making 30% of AMI and questioned how the City would
meet that goal. He stated he would like the City to be more aggressive with the target and
require 18-20% affordable housing units
Councilmember Spano agreed that the policy should not include an option for developers to
make a payment in lieu of. He urged the City to remain mindful about having regular
conversations with tenants as their income grows vis-à-vis the AMI scale. He spoke in favor of
the density bonus incentive but only in specific areas. He asked if consideration had been given
to having a broad number for requinng affordable units and then letting the developer fit his
project within that requirement, e.g., four affordable units at 30% AMI and eight affordable units
at 50%AMI or all of the affordable units at 60% AMI.
Ms. Schnitker did not feel that developers would be able to get to 30% AMI without deep
subsidies and agreed to look at this further including the possibility of requiring less units at
greater affordability levels.
Councilmember Sanger asked how heavily involved City staff need to be as it relates to
screening eligibility of tenants, either initially or ongoing, and enforcement of the policy's
requirements and was concerned about the administrative burden on City staff.
Ms. Schnitker stated that most of the income certification work waiting list management and
eligibility screening would be done by the developer and the developer would have to submit a
plan to the City describing how this would be done She acknowledged that the City will need to
monitor the plan and will need to consider how involved City staff should be with enforcement.
Councilmember Lindberg stated he was not overly excited about the idea of providing density
bonuses or parking requirement reductions and was concerned about the practical implications to
neighborhoods that are directly impacted by a particular project and he had concerns about going
too far without further study of these issues. He stated he was also concerned about the offsite
construction component and did not want to see a developer come into a highly marketable area
and then have the option to provide affordable units in a less attractive area because it sends the
wrong message.
Councilmember Sanger suggested that this option state that affordable units constructed at
another site have to be of comparable quality.
Study Session Minutes -4- March 23, 2015
Mayor Jacobs spoke in favor of the proposed inclusionary affordable housing policy and was
hopeful that other communities would adopt this type of policy.
It was the consensus of the City Council that the inclusionary affordable housing policy should
not allow the income and affordability requirements to be fulfilled by payment of a fee to the
City in lieu of developing any income or rent restricted housing units.
Ms. Schnitker advised that City staff would continue working with the MN Challenge Project
and Cornerstone and bring a final draft of the policy to Council for review and approval as well
as work on drafting the implementation guidelines.
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
Mr. Harmening stated the Environment & Sustainability Commission has submitted its annual
report and work plan and asked if Council would like to meet with the Commission.
It was the consensus of the City Council to meet with the Environment & Sustainability
Commission to discuss the 2014 annual report and 2015 work plan.
Mr. Harmening discussed staff's concerns about the Environment & Sustainability Commission
and requested input from Council about the Commission's goals.
Councilmember Mavity suggested having the Commission's work groups submit their reports to
Council and meet with Council to discuss their priorities.
It was the consensus of the City Council to meet with the Environment & Sustainability
Commission on April 13, 2015.
Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 9.14 p.m.
Written reports provided and documented for recording purposes only.
5. Environment& Sustainability Commission 2014 Annual Report& 2015 Work Plan
6. Update on Central Park West Project
7. Creation of JCPP Multicultural Advisory Committee
8. February 2015 Monthly Financial Report
9. Update on SWLRT Station Area Form-Based Code
10. Bass Lake Preserve Restoration Project U)�aIte
a (`_—
Melissa Kenne• , City Clerk Jeff Ja , ayor